If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Comment

Nope. A calorie is always a calorie. What varies is the health of a person's metabolism. That often is determined by vitamin and mineral repletion and proper hormonal balances. Get your soluble vitamins and minerals (from whole foods, not supplements), avoid toxins, make sure you're eating enough but not too much, exercise regularly, sleep well. CW has this idea right. The OP's issue wasn't calories but rather lack of nutrition.

The only way to prove your point will be for the OP to eat nothing but Twinkies (I hear they are coming back) for the next 12 months at the rate of 1500 calories per day.

Comment

That point has already been proved over and over again! Cookie and cake diets for weightloss works due to calorie restriction and is old news...

I guess that would have to depend on your definition of "works". How effective is it for losing weight in the real world, rather than in a laboratory? Is it a diet people can stick to, or do you blame the participants for "failing" when they drop out?

Of course on a "twinkie only" diet, weight loss would be rapid, seeing they are not presently in production anywhere.

Comment

That point has already been proved over and over again! Cookie and cake diets for weightloss works due to calorie restriction and is old news...

An obese person eating a reduced calorie Twinkie diet would lose weight, but what would happen to a Primal Beast(ess) who has regained health, lost a lot of weight, and is eating super-healthy primal foods? My thought is that within a year, eating an average of 1500calories of Twinkie per day, this person would regain weight, look like crap, feel like crap, and have some medical issues--proving that 1500 calories X 365 of Twinkie is not equal to 1500 calories X 365 of real food.

Comment

She was not counting calories in the traditional sense, she was tracking her calories--two completely different things! In a normal calorie counting scheme, one aims for a specific calorie target each day, clearly she did not do that, she followed her "inner grokkette" and ate what turned out to be approximately 1500 calories per day.

I think the problem with traditional calorie counting, is that if you aim to eat 1500 calories per day, you will, and often more, due to poor labels and misjudgment, but you will rarely eat under 1500 calories a day, because you have a target in mind.

Does that make sense?

Comment

I guess that would have to depend on your definition of "works". How effective is it for losing weight in the real world, rather than in a laboratory? Is it a diet people can stick to, or do you blame the participants for "failing" when they drop out?

Of course on a "twinkie only" diet, weight loss would be rapid, seeing they are not presently in production anywhere.

It "works" for weightloss, but like water fasting or the potato diet it is not something you are supposed to do for a very long time! But yes, you will lose weight in a calorie deficit by eating cakes, "twinkies" or potatos...

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

- Schopenhauer

Comment

An obese person eating a reduced calorie Twinkie diet would lose weight, but what would happen to a Primal Beast(ess) who has regained health, lost a lot of weight, and is eating super-healthy primal foods? My thought is that within a year, eating an average of 1500calories of Twinkie per day, this person would regain weight, look like crap, feel like crap, and have some medical issues--proving that 1500 calories X 365 of Twinkie is not equal to 1500 calories X 365 of real food.

A twinkie diet is not a healthy and sustainable way of eating of course, but it can be used for weightloss for some time if the dieter wants to try it, but for one year I wouldn't recommend it! And no, you would not regain weight if eating at maintainance, but the bodycompositon and health may be suffering after one year on twinkies only...

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

- Schopenhauer

Comment

It "works" for weightloss, but like water fasting or the potato diet it is not something you are supposed to do for a very long time! But yes, you will lose weight in a calorie deficit by eating cakes, "twinkies" or potatos...

Citation needed. Please show me a real-world experiment where people in a real-world situation (not a laboratory) followed this diet or one very similar, lost weight, and kept if off. There also has to be enough participants remaining at the end of the experiment to be significant, and exit surveys for those who drop out, to find out why.

What you are talking is purely hypothetical, "if they stuck to the diet" you figure "it would work". I don't count that as a diet that "works", if all the participants dropped out because they were unable to stay with it. Or if it has never happened once.

Kind of like the old joke where the surgery was a success, but the patient died.

Comment

Citation needed. Please show me a real-world experiment where people in a real-world situation (not a laboratory) followed this diet or one very similar, lost weight, and kept if off. There also has to be enough participants remaining at the end of the experiment to be significant, and exit surveys for those who drop out, to find out why.

What you are talking is purely hypothetical, "if they stuck to the diet" you figure "it would work". I don't count that as a diet that "works", if all the participants dropped out because they were unable to stay with it. Or if it has never happened once.

Kind of like the old joke where the surgery was a success, but the patient died.

Do your research, I will not spend any time seaching diets for you about what is generally common knowlegde, and I don't think anything that I come up with will convince you anyway! People that denies that a calorie deficit works for weightloss are similar to those that still believes that the earth is flat, no argument whatsoever will convince them, so why bother?
And yes, ALL diets works when creating a calorie deficit, the cookie diet, juice fasting, waterfasting, PSMF, paleo, atkins etc., etc., ad infinitum...

People have been waterfasting for up to an year with great results, so why should a 800 kcal deficit on a twinkie diet be worse than that?

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

- Schopenhauer

Comment

Do your research, I will not spend any time seaching diets for you about what is generally common knowlegde, and I don't think anything that I come up with will convince you anyway! People that denies that a calorie deficit works for weightloss are similar to those that still believes that the earth is flat, no argument whatsoever will convince them, so why bother?
And yes, ALL diets works when creating a calorie deficit, the cookie diet, juice fasting, waterfasting, PSMF, paleo, atkins etc., etc., ad infinitum...

People have been waterfasting for up to an year with great results, so why should a 800 kcal deficit on a twinkie diet be worse than that?

You have no research whatever to support your claim that this is an effective diet in a real world situation. The fact that people in a hospital have lost weight on a water fast of any length is irrelevant.

But you admit as much.

Comment

Reality is, I could present multiple real-world studies and tests, but that still wouldn't satisfy anyone. There's no point in citing any research or literature, when one is already dedicated to a particular belief.

I don't believe that touching an open flame can burn my finger. Show me one real world study that proves it will burn me if I do.

Comment

Reality is, I could present multiple real-world studies and tests, but that still wouldn't satisfy anyone. There's no point in citing any research or literature, when one is already dedicated to a particular belief.

I don't believe that touching an open flame can burn my finger. Show me one real world study that proves it will burn me if I do.

Really, you could present multiple real-world studies that showed people losing weight, getting down to their ideal weight, and keeping it off indefinitely while eating only cake, but you're not going to?

That is an extraordinary claim.

And you make up some sort of BS to support this claim?

Comment

Like I said, it wouldn't matter or change your opinion if I presented you a study. You have just as much access to all of the studies that any of us do. You pick the ones that support your position, and you ignore the ones that don't.

Comment

Like I said, it wouldn't matter or change your opinion if I presented you a study. You have just as much access to all of the studies that any of us do. You pick the ones that support your position, and you ignore the ones that don't.

and likewise for your own opinions.

"There are no short cuts to enlightenment, the journey is the destination, you have to walk this path alone"